Indus Towers Limited (Formerly knows as Bharti Infratel Limited) vs Union of India

In a recent legal proceeding, Mr. A. Kanodia, representing the petitioner, presented arguments via virtual mode. He was accompanied by Mr. P. Das, another counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. S.C. Keyal, the learned Standing Counsel for CGST, who represented all the respondents in the case. Throughout the session, Mr. Kanodia provided thorough insights and arguments in favor of the petitioner’s stance. With the assistance of Mr. Das and Mr. Keyal, they presented a comprehensive case covering various legal aspects and pertinent points relevant to the matter at hand. The discussions were conducted meticulously, addressing each aspect of the case with clarity and precision. Both sides presented their arguments articulately, aiming to persuade the court in their favor. The exchange between the counsels was professional and focused on legal merits, contributing to a productive and informative session. The petitioner’s legal team, under the guidance of Mr. Kanodia, demonstrated a strong grasp of the case’s complexities, while Mr. Keyal, representing the respondents, presented a robust defense. Overall, the proceedings reflected a diligent and thorough examination of the legal issues involved, laying the groundwork for further deliberations and eventual resolution by the court.

In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged various actions of the respondents. The petitioner primarily contests [i] Notification no. 09/2023 – Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 [referred to as Annexure-I]; and [ii] a Demand–cum–Show Cause Notice identified as C. No. IV[15]25/SCNBharati/II-D/ACG-II/2023/2429 dated 21.12.2023 [referred to as Annexure-II], which was issued by respondent no. 2 to the petitioner.

The petitioner, through this legal recourse, seeks to challenge the validity and legality of the aforementioned notification and notice issued by the concerned authority. The Notification no. 09/2023 – Central Tax, issued on 31st March 2023, appears to be a central tax notification that the petitioner finds objectionable or harmful to their interests. Similarly, the Demand–cum–Show Cause Notice dated 21st December 2023, issued by respondent no. 2, seems to have prompted the petitioner to raise legal objections and seek redress.

The petitioner’s grievances likely revolve around the content, interpretation, or application of the notification and notice. These documents might contain provisions or directives that the petitioner believes are unjust, unlawful, or prejudicial to their rights or interests. The petitioner contends that these actions infringe upon their constitutional rights or exceed the authority vested in the respondents.

In essence, the petitioner is challenging the legality and constitutionality of the actions taken by the respondents, asserting that they are entitled to relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This provision empowers the High Courts to issue writs, orders, or directions to enforce fundamental rights and for any other purpose.

By initiating this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the intervention of the court to review, annul, or modify the impugned notification and notice. They likely aim to secure a favorable judicial determination that safeguards their rights, interests, or legitimate expectations.

The outcome of this petition will depend on various factors, including the legal arguments presented by both parties, the evidence brought before the court, and the applicable laws and precedents. The court will assess the merits of the petitioner’s claims and determine whether the impugned actions are indeed unlawful, unconstitutional, or otherwise invalid. 

The Notification dated 31.03.2023, issued under the authority granted by Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, as well as corresponding provisions in the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, signifies a significant regulatory move in the realm of taxation. This notification extends or alters the time limit delineated in sub-section 10 of the aforementioned acts, indicating a likely adjustment or extension of deadlines related to compliance or procedural matters concerning goods and services taxation. Such notifications are critical tools utilized by tax authorities to adapt to changing circumstances, provide relief, or streamline processes within the taxation framework. The issuance of this notification underscores the dynamic nature of tax regulations and the continuous efforts to align them with the evolving needs of the economy and taxpayers.

Download Pdf:
INDUS TOWERS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS BHARTI INFRATEL LIMITED)

For Reference Visit:
Gauhati High Court

Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law